Type IIa Fibers These fast twitch muscle fibers are also known as intermediate fast-twitch fibers. They can use both aerobic and anaerobic metabolism almost equally to create energy. In this way, they are a combination of Type I and Type II muscle fibers.

Type IIb Fibers These fast twitch fibers use anaerobic metabolism to create energy and are the "classic" fast twitch muscle fibers that excel at producing quick, powerful bursts of speed. This muscle fiber has the highest rate of contraction (rapid firing) of all the muscle fiber types, but it also has a much faster rate of fatigue and can't last as long before it needs rest.

After trying big rungs a few times they do not give the same gains that i am making from the 3/4 inch in terms of finger strength. However, you are doing doubles where as im still doing taps and ladders.

I just can't figure out how such big rungs can bring a massive improvement, i have tried them multiple times and in comparison to 3/4 inch they do not stress the fingers as much. I do however notice a much greater effort required from the upper muscles in doubles over taps and ladders. Do you think that because you are doing doubles it has enabled you to develop a better mix of fast twitch as quoted above?.

Is it possible that the gains made were down to the mix of losing weight and training more fast twitch in the upper muscles?. Also side question, would the slight lock offs in campusing also train slow twitch?.

I know it is a stupid question to ask, as we are so use to fingers being the weakest link. Again i do not doubt your progress, but i just don't understand it.

The theory as i read (i think the scc?) is that the faster you can climb a route the less energy you would use (obviously wit ought sacrificing efficiency). So that in my mind painted a picture that dynamic momentum based climbing is the most efficient when possible. Given the fact you're muscles should have a high level of both twitch by now (maybe even more so fast?) perhaps it has allowed you to make the most efficient style moves?.

Im interested to know if you think this could have had any baring on your gains. Although im fully expecting to just get flamed to death again.

Also 1 more question. I know that fast twitch can put down the same force as slow (little more maybe). It takes less than half half a second to get full contraction out of fast twitch?. Out of slow twitch i don't know? maybe 1 to 2 seconds?. I think i understand that both ''should'' use around the same energy to get to max contraction in their quickest time. However.. in climbing although fast twitch contraction duration will not be effected i can perfectly understand how slow twitch contraction times can well exceed ''normal'' slow twitch contraction time. So am i just completely wrong in that understanding or will it be far more efficiant to use fast twitch contractions in form of dynamic climbing when ever possible?.

After trying big rungs a few times they do not give the same gains that i am making from the 3/4 inch in terms of finger strength. However, you are doing doubles where as im still doing taps and ladders.

How're you quantifying your finger strength gains? If it's by watching how many sets/reps you can complete for this training method, how're you controlling your experiment for improvements in technique?

It may (may!) be more accurate to ignore the first two or three weeks of the training (perhaps even a month), during which time you're putting together better technique for it. An activity like campusing rungs has much less technique available to be learned. Therefore, it seems logical that one would reach the point where muscular gains outpace technique gains much more quickly than actually climbing.

During the first few weeks, I think your body would still be making gains in places other than your fingers (technique, tension, etc), and since your goal is to measure finger strength while attempting to control for other gains, you might want to perhaps throw out the first few weeks.

Perhaps you're already doing this.

You've gone into this with the idea that you're going to be flamed. I'm not flaming you. I'm curious.

After trying big rungs a few times they do not give the same gains that i am making from the 3/4 inch in terms of finger strength. However, you are doing doubles where as im still doing taps and ladders.

How're you quantifying your finger strength gains? If it's by watching how many sets/reps you can complete for this training method, how're you controlling your experiment for improvements in technique?

It may (may!) be more accurate to ignore the first two or three weeks of the training (perhaps even a month), during which time you're putting together better technique for it. An activity like campusing rungs has much less technique available to be learned. Therefore, it seems logical that one would reach the point where muscular gains outpace technique gains much more quickly than actually climbing.

During the first few weeks, I think your body would still be making gains in places other than your fingers (technique, tension, etc), and since your goal is to measure finger strength while attempting to control for other gains, you might want to perhaps throw out the first few weeks.

Perhaps you're already doing this.

You've gone into this with the idea that you're going to be flamed. I'm not flaming you. I'm curious.

Well, for me the concern was what failed first (both using 20 lb). With 3/4 inch my fingers start to reach failure.. then i just fall off. Although i do not think my upper body is far behind at that point. I'm doing taps to the 3rd rail 6 reps per set.

With doubles on the bigger rungs my fingers do not feel close to failure but my upper muscles do until again, i fall off. Also it is worth noting that i was able to increase the reps dramatically given the fact my fingers had less load. Since it feels far easier on my fingers i do question if they would be exposed to raw strength gains.. or if they would actually be making some mid/high form of endurance gains (that would also explain allot). Clearly the upper muscles had plenty more time to recruit what ever it is their able to recruit.

Edit - Just to make this all clear.. im just trying to figure out if im putting too much emphasis on maximum finger strength gains. Right now it feels almost like a step back to use those bigger rungs.. but clearly im missing some other huge gains that are made from that. As flesh has shown. Im just curious what exactly they are.

im just trying to figure out if im putting too much emphasis on maximum finger strength gains.

what are the objectives you train for in the short span (0-6 months)? Any specific routes/boulders? Grades, styles? Any incoming trips, projects, competitions, etc? Are these goals truly motivating? Challenging, but realistic? Limited in number and not conflicting with each other?

if your objectives are well formulated squeeze your brain and you'll have the answer... (of course, if flesh is a friend of yours who actually knows you and your objectives very well, he can give an informed advice on this matter)

(and of course smaller rungs are for fingers and doubles on bigger rungs are for big muscles and coordination : jus ask yourself what you need the most...)

i don't know, for the sake of discussion... your question sounds like someone who trains for the sake of training (good, training is fun in a way!) or someone who trains to "get better at climbing" without a clear idea of what "better" means for you.

I'm very critical of the second case. I see the desire to to improve at something without being able to define what improvement means in the details as the sign of one (or more) of the following cases: -very simply, lack of goal-setting skills, or overlooking the importance of goal-setting. -lack of a genuine passion fo the activity where the improvement is desired. The passion is there for "improvement", rather than for climbing or whatever other activity it is referred to. -lack of personality. someone who waits for others to set trends, expectations, standards he/she needs to conform to.

im just trying to figure out if im putting too much emphasis on maximum finger strength gains.

what are the objectives you train for in the short span (0-6 months)? Any specific routes/boulders? Grades, styles? Any incoming trips, projects, competitions, etc? Are these goals truly motivating? Challenging, but realistic? Limited in number and not conflicting with each other?

if your objectives are well formulated squeeze your brain and you'll have the answer... (of course, if flesh is a friend of yours who actually knows you and your objectives very well, he can give an informed advice on this matter)

(and of course smaller rungs are for fingers and doubles on bigger rungs are for big muscles and coordination : jus ask yourself what you need the most...)

i don't know, for the sake of discussion... your question sounds like someone who trains for the sake of training (good, training is fun in a way!) or someone who trains to "get better at climbing" without a clear idea of what "better" means for you.

I'm very critical of the second case. I see the desire to to improve at something without being able to define what improvement means in the details as the sign of one (or more) of the following cases: -very simply, lack of goal-setting skills, or overlooking the importance of goal-setting. -lack of a genuine passion fo the activity where the improvement is desired. The passion is there for "improvement", rather than for climbing or whatever other activity it is referred to. -lack of personality. someone who waits for others to set trends, expectations, standards he/she needs to conform to.

Not quite sure why personal goals or motivation has anything to do with this.

I do hope fast twitch is not that important because if this is true ''The problem is that fast and superfast twitch fibers can be changed into slow twitch fibers by doing endurance training. But once they change, they don't change back.'' then allot of us are fucked..

Or is that why doubles are so good?.. so you can build mass and then recruit it to fast twitch?.

im just trying to figure out if im putting too much emphasis on maximum finger strength gains.

what are the objectives you train for in the short span (0-6 months)? Any specific routes/boulders? Grades, styles? Any incoming trips, projects, competitions, etc? Are these goals truly motivating? Challenging, but realistic? Limited in number and not conflicting with each other?

if your objectives are well formulated squeeze your brain and you'll have the answer... (of course, if flesh is a friend of yours who actually knows you and your objectives very well, he can give an informed advice on this matter)

(and of course smaller rungs are for fingers and doubles on bigger rungs are for big muscles and coordination : jus ask yourself what you need the most...)

i don't know, for the sake of discussion... your question sounds like someone who trains for the sake of training (good, training is fun in a way!) or someone who trains to "get better at climbing" without a clear idea of what "better" means for you.

I'm very critical of the second case. I see the desire to to improve at something without being able to define what improvement means in the details as the sign of one (or more) of the following cases: -very simply, lack of goal-setting skills, or overlooking the importance of goal-setting. -lack of a genuine passion fo the activity where the improvement is desired. The passion is there for "improvement", rather than for climbing or whatever other activity it is referred to. -lack of personality. someone who waits for others to set trends, expectations, standards he/she needs to conform to.

Not quite sure why personal goals or motivation has anything to do with this.

I do hope fast twitch is not that important because if this is true ''The problem is that fast and superfast twitch fibers can be changed into slow twitch fibers by doing endurance training. But once they change, they don't change back.'' then allot of us are fucked..

Or is that why doubles are so good?.. so you can build mass and then recruit it to fast twitch?.

This is not true, so no worry.

They can be changed back. In fact, it is easier to convert slow-twitch fibers into fast-twitch fibers than converting fast-twitch fibers into slow-twitch fibers.

We've actually known this since the 1960's, following work by A.J. Buller and (nobel-prize winner) John Eccles. They used several methods to demonstrate that slow twitch fibers could be converted to fast-twitch fibers and vice versa. In one method, they took a nerve that was hooked up to one fiber type, then hooked it up to the other fiber type. So, the fibers were controlled by the opposite type of nerve than they were used to. The result was that the fibers would adapt to the nerve signal, and become what the nerve signal demanded. Slow-twitch fibers convert to fast-twitch fibers and fast-twitch fibers convert to slow-twitch fibers, as long as the signal demands it. Here is one example from this line of research:

So, the signal is what's important, and the signal is triggered by the effort you exert. This action of triggering the fibers with a signal is exactly what you're doing when you exert the type of effort you exert--you're sending the nerve signals that tell the fibers what to be. It starts in the brain with your effort and tells the fibers how they need to adapt. Once you send that signal, the fiber then expresses the gene that converts it into the type of fiber that the signal demands. It is part of a process called "epigenesis," which deals with how the expression of genes is not predetermined but rather a reaction to signals.

So, if you demand that a particular muscle performs more explosively, you are triggering the expression of the genes within some of those slower-twitch fibers to convert the fibers to fast-twitch for that explosive activity. And vice-versa.

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

For some reason, I skimmed down to that article's penultimate paragraph, which is completely wrong:

'admin' wrote:

So your body will burn energy in the following order. First it uses adrenaline. When your adrenaline is depleted it will burn glucose. When your glucose is depleted, it will make more glucose or glycogen. Where does it get the molecules to make this extra glucose? It comes from that place where your body stored all the carbs you weren't using, in your fat cells. This is how the body burns fat. As a general rule, after twenty minutes of continuous exercise (running, swimming, climbing, etc), your body will deplete its available reserve of adrenaline and glucose. After that, you are burning your stored energy (fat).

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

The range was 7b to a arguably soft 8a (so i call it 7c+). Attempts wise, i don't see the point in even trying to count.. they were all at or past my limit at that time so they all took allot of failed attempts.

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

The range was 7b to a arguably soft 8a (so i call it 7c+). Attempts wise, i don't see the point in even trying to count.. they were all at or past my limit at that time so they all took allot of failed attempts.

I didn't ask for a range. Have you ever red pointed a route graded 8a or 7c+?

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

The range was 7b to a arguably soft 8a (so i call it 7c+). Attempts wise, i don't see the point in even trying to count.. they were all at or past my limit at that time so they all took allot of failed attempts.

I didn't ask for a range. Have you ever red pointed a route graded 8a or 7c+?

To be perfectly honest, i rarely find myself climbing something that i can do in so few attempts any more. I genuinely have no idea, sorry.

What is the hardest grade you consistently send after projecting?

What do you mean after?.. maybe i should have been more clear. All i do is project something that was harder than the last project. Amongst that has been some form of training, be it endurance or my current urge to campus. Really, i can not answer your question.

And thank you learner, that was informative. I also found an article on this site about twitch recruitment, but i guess it may be out dated now too.

The range was 7b to a arguably soft 8a (so i call it 7c+). Attempts wise, i don't see the point in even trying to count.. they were all at or past my limit at that time so they all took allot of failed attempts.

I didn't ask for a range. Have you ever red pointed a route graded 8a or 7c+?

Not quite sure why personal goals or motivation has anything to do with this..

it has because if, let's say, i'm a runner and more specifically i'm motivated by marathons, i don't give a fuck about fast twitch fibers, and that ends the discussion.

(just to make a gross generalization. but my point was more about your hamletic doubt between two campus board routines, than about the non-reversibility issue).

whether and how the non-reversibility thing is important in climbing is an interesting issue in itself. (edit : apparently it's not such a big issue anyway, if learner is right?)

My 2 cents is that it's too early to know for sure, and we're still in an era where empiricism works best. An answer sounding like "doubles improve your reach and hand-eye coordination in big dynamic moves" should satisfy you. Still too early to focus on the science behind it, imho.

remember that most sports physiology studies are about "simple" tasks such as running or weightlifting, and we have a hard time applying knoledge gained in those areas to climbing...

maybe in 10 years climbing comps will go olympic and all WC athletes in boulder, lead and speed competitions will be followed by a medical staff à-la-Patxi... then we'll have the kind of answers you are looking for, and knowing those answer will make a true difference (at the elite level).

(hint : if we only look at muscular issues, 90% of the times the limiting factor on any climb/move comes from your finger flexors being too weak or not having enough stamina. Empirically speaking, you have to hold those crimps, pockets, slopers and pinches!

Now, your finger flexors normally perform a series of isometric contractions during a climb. Whereas those sports or exercises from which we try to borrow our knowledge mostly involve bigger muscles and in a much more dynamic fashion... that's the root of the problem and the reason why i'm skeptical.

Though, if anyone has good scientific resources about the physiology of intermittent isometric contractions in a smaller muscle group, i'm very interested...)

Not quite sure why personal goals or motivation has anything to do with this..

it has because if, let's say, i'm a runner and more specifically i'm motivated by marathons, i don't give a fuck about fast twitch fibers, and that ends the discussion.

(just to make a gross generalization. but my point was more about your hamletic doubt between two campus board routines, than about the non-reversibility issue).

whether and how the non-reversibility thing is important in climbing is an interesting issue in itself. (edit : apparently it's not such a big issue anyway, if learner is right?)

My 2 cents is that it's too early to know for sure, and we're still in an era where empiricism works best. An answer sounding like "doubles improve your reach and hand-eye coordination in big dynamic moves" should satisfy you. Still too early to focus on the science behind it, imho.

remember that most sports physiology studies are about "simple" tasks such as running or weightlifting, and we have a hard time applying knoledge gained in those areas to climbing...

maybe in 10 years climbing comps will go olympic and all WC athletes in boulder, lead and speed competitions will be followed by a medical staff à-la-Patxi... then we'll have the kind of answers you are looking for, and knowing those answer will make a true difference (at the elite level).

(hint : if we only look at muscular issues, 90% of the times the limiting factor on any climb/move comes from your finger flexors being too weak or not having enough stamina. Empirically speaking, you have to hold those crimps, pockets, slopers and pinches!

Now, your finger flexors normally perform a series of isometric contractions during a climb. Whereas those sports or exercises from which we try to borrow our knowledge mostly involve bigger muscles and in a much more dynamic fashion... that's the root of the problem and the reason why i'm skeptical.

Though, if anyone has good scientific resources about the physiology of intermittent isometric contractions in a smaller muscle group, i'm very interested...)

Yeah i understand that, but just as a example.. The hold positivity can be manipulated in such a way (by adjusting all round body position) where it is in fact easier on the fingers at the cost of multiple larger muscle groups engaging in the chain (none of this is new sure). But, when such muscles are in a half contracted state (give or take).. just maybe it is that much more difficult to generate any kind of movement from them as well. Like for example, if i put my fist 1 inch from your face and punched you.. it would not hurt much because i could not generate much force. If i do it from arms length then its another story. Not that i want to punch you

If those muscles are not trained to sustain high level and duration of work (ontop of providing pwoer from short contraction span) it will ofc feel so much harder.. perhaps to the point where superior finger endurance/strength takes over and the rest of the body reacts in a way that is actually not efficient (although it my feel like it is easier). that person would have to have far greater finger strength or endurance to complete X route than what is really needed.

Fingers are used so much and i think for the majority of normal climbers are finger/fore arm endurance far out does are upper muscles, for some maybe even core. I can easily dead hang a 1 inch surface for well over a minute but i can not do a lock off for that time.. (yes i tested) that in my opinion is a ludicrous weakness in upper body. Little fingers out doing bigger muscle groups just does not feel right to me.

So that kinda brings it back to the original point. Flesh was using massive rungs, im still not convinced they gave significant finger strength improvement (in fact i do question if any gains would have been made in raw strength on such rungs). But still.. he made huge improvement.

Seems that the reason such gains were made was because of anything but fingers, apart from needing them to hang on ofc. That i guess would be huge endurance, strength, lock off, power generating improvements in the upper muscles (with fast and slow recruitment i guess?).. coordination maybe?.. some contact maybe? defo a little core. And ofc, something that probably contributed a big chunk of the improvement was losing weight.

That is all just a hashed up theory.. don't get mad people?.

Also something that bothers me. Every sport seems to have other supplementary training.. but for us it is still seen as not applicable for the most part. This is a genuine question with no sarcasm intended. Do you really think climbers can ''just climb'' and actually train every muscle group used to its optimal level?. Don't you think their are just far too many variables in climbing to ensure every muscle group and its pair get the same work out?. Were some climbers may get past those veriables (i guess with ought even knowing it).. how many may not. Maybe 1 weakness in the chain stops all the other parts making progress?. Hint being, he relatively removed fingers from the equation.. and actually made significant gains?.

Actually there are many sports where just doing that sport is about the best you thing you can do, and that crosstraining hasn't been found to be particularly beneficial. One of which is cycling, with the exception of track sprints almost all cyclists train by cycling more, no need for weight lifting or running to maximize gains.

Actually there are many sports where just doing that sport is about the best you thing you can do, and that crosstraining hasn't been found to be particularly beneficial. One of which is cycling, with the exception of track sprints almost all cyclists train by cycling more, no need for weight lifting or running to maximize gains.

My step father is an avid cyclist yet he also uses his own indoor cycle machine allot. He knows his shit about biking so i can't see him doing it with ought good reason. He took me out once on a down hill dirt track or what ever ''its fun'' he said. Yeah sure, the first few min to get down was... then 10-15 min to ride back up.. fuck that.

Actually there are many sports where just doing that sport is about the best you thing you can do, and that crosstraining hasn't been found to be particularly beneficial. One of which is cycling, with the exception of track sprints almost all cyclists train by cycling more, no need for weight lifting or running to maximize gains.

My step father is an avid cyclist yet he also uses his own indoor cycle machine allot. He knows his shit about biking so i can't see him doing it with ought good reason.